Tractor Confusion

[Soundguy]

In all fairness, take a look at Massey's AG line. It WASN't and still ISN'T "old technology". Some of the smaller utilities hung on to a SUCCESSFUL "old technology as a basis, adding new ideas along the way, but their big stuff was as modern as anyones line, more modern than some. Outside of a few areas in the U.S., Massey's name jumps right to the top of the list. We tend to think in terms of our little world. Europe, Asia, South America, and Africa see Massey in a totally different light. For years, Massey has held the "Chrysler Corp" position in the U.S. and led the rest of the world.

When it comes to marketing.. "regional' seems to make more of a difference than 'international'.

I'm not specifically refering to the ag line.. more like CUT to UT.. say from the late 60's thru the 90's. Remember.. I'm an antique guy. The tractors of the last 15 years don't do much for me. The fact that I have had a couple tractors newer than 75 was due to shear luck of me falling into a deal I couldn't afford to pass up. Looking at jd and Nh tractors from the 60's thru the late 80's.. and then looking at MF.. MF tended to stay with more tried and true features and technology as a basis.

When i say 'old' technology in reference to MF.. it's a sign of respect.. not a slur. For instance. When NH dropped the 'boxy' thousand series legacy line that ford had in favor of the "T" series.. I lost alotof respect for them.. smaller engines.. aske dto do more.. smaller castings.. etc. I realize some engine and metalurgy technology advanced a little... but I much prefer overdesign on a device that is made to be used hard every day.. vs 'just enough' engineering that I see going into the newer models. For all the world.. it looks like the 'disposable generation' has arrived full scale into the ag world. I don't expect to see modern tractors produced that will survive and run 100ys down the line ( parades and shows ).. or have usefull lifespans of 60 years or more... like we do today with the old iron.

Soundguy

 

[Soundguy]

That's it! All the "statistics" in the universe make not the first scrap of difference. It's all about will it do the job? Am I happy with the deal I got? Am I comfortable using my tractor?

Specs, statistics, and sales numbers are for filling bandwidth on websites.

I disagree to a point. Those things like market share and #'s produced will effect one very important issue... spare parts and dealer service.

Why do you think you can walk into a napa or TSc and get quite a huge assortment of bolt on parts for the Ford N series of tractor? It's because from 39-52 nearly a million 9n/2n/8n were produced.. and had quite a few overlapping parts. many 9n parts even carried over thru the hundred series and early thousand series.

Soundguy

 

[Farmwithjunk]

I disagree to a point. Those things like market share and #'s produced will effect one very important issue... spare parts and dealer service.

Why do you think you can walk into a napa or TSc and get quite a huge assortment of bolt on parts for the Ford N series of tractor? It's because from 39-52 nearly a million 9n/2n/8n were produced.. and had quite a few overlapping parts. many 9n parts even carried over thru the hundred series and early thousand series.

Soundguy

The same point that validates statistics, kills their worth too.

On paper, an 8N was underpowered, under equipped, poor brakes, too lightweight, ect, ect,....

Yet they sold in droves. Specs and statistics don't always give a true indication of worth or popularity.

It's like a basketball game. The only "stat" that ever mattered was the final score.

On newer tractors;

I'm down on the "big 3" as well as the next 3 and the 3 after them for all these misleading stats they present to make their latest technological wonderdog look like a space shutle with 3-point hitch.

And on "old technology":

I didn't take the comment about Masseys old technology as a slur. In fact, I take it as a compliment to the brand. No need to change just for the sake of change. My only point was, their newer BIG ag tractors are just as modern as their competition. And at a lower sticker price. In my book, that's what I call a winner.

You want to impress me? Lower the price about 500%.

 

[Woodbeef]

When it comes to marketing.. "regional' seems to make more of a difference than 'international'.

I'm not specifically refering to the ag line.. more like CUT to UT.. say from the late 60's thru the 90's. Remember.. I'm an antique guy. The tractors of the last 15 years don't do much for me. The fact that I have had a couple tractors newer than 75 was due to shear luck of me falling into a deal I couldn't afford to pass up. Looking at jd and Nh tractors from the 60's thru the late 80's.. and then looking at MF.. MF tended to stay with more tried and true features and technology as a basis.

When i say 'old' technology in reference to MF.. it's a sign of respect.. not a slur. For instance. When NH dropped the 'boxy' thousand series legacy line that ford had in favor of the "T" series.. I lost alotof respect for them.. smaller engines.. aske dto do more.. smaller castings.. etc. I realize some engine and metalurgy technology advanced a little... but I much prefer overdesign on a device that is made to be used hard every day.. vs 'just enough' engineering that I see going into the newer models. For all the world.. it looks like the 'disposable generation' has arrived full scale into the ag world. I don't expect to see modern tractors produced that will survive and run 100ys down the line ( parades and shows ).. or have usefull lifespans of 60 years or more... like we do today with the old iron.

Soundguy

The old Ford designs are pretty well gone except for the the TB and TT lines. All the rest are of Fiat origins built for Europe,not North America. Different philosophies on weight,and engine sizes among other things.

 

[Soundguy]

For statistics.. you have to take them one at a time. Not all statistics are misleading.. just the ones marketing puts out (grin). Historacle statistics mean much more.. such as.. company 'X' produced 'yyyyyyyyy' tractors from this period in history to this period in history. It's a statistic that also happens to be fact.. unlike most info that come out of salesmen's mouths.

I couldn't hold an informed conversation on -anybody's- new ag line. If it's a 90 model or newer and over 100 hp.. I likely have not even seen it or heard about it. My ag tractor interest falls in the oldies..like the ford 8000/9600 .. TW series...big fiat/allis .. (fordson county .. for an oddity).. mid-late case 1xxx series.. etc.. etc. Old monsters that now sell for pennies on the dollar... Kinda sad that you can get a late 60's ford 8000 for about 4000$ now...dual rears and all...

As for ford N brakes.. they work fine... when adjusted and clean.

People have a tendency to do -0- service on machines then complain about them. Early Ford N sumps held just under 5g of tranny fluid. And people didn't service the hydro pump / rear end/ trannies well.. sludge built up
in the sump, and made the sump overfull if you just dumped in 5g on a refill. All that extra oil pooled at the axle trumpet mouths and tranny input shaft seals waiting for an excuse to leak. I can't count how many clutch jobs I've seen and people won't spend the whopping 4$ to replace the tranny input shaft seal on an N.. for added insurance... they wait till it leaks to fix it.. vs preventative maintenance.

As for the axle seals? 9n/2n didn't have an awesome setup.. but the sure-seal retrofit works perfectly if installed correctly.. thus ending greasy brake shoes. The stradle brake setup on the 9n / 2n also didn't suit many people well if they didn't adjust the clutch dog to depress the left brake pedal when clutching, thus giving you both brakes. I've seen tons of 9n/2n with wore out right brakes.. and 'new' left brakes.

Early 8n axle seals were prone to leak if the hub came loose... Again.. nobody bothered to read the manual and check that axle nut for 450f# every now and then, and thus.. once the nut became loose.. the soft cast hub worn against the hardened axle splines, and made a loose sloppy fit. the hub was tapered.. so once wore.. it would never tighten down... thus leaks occoured.

Later 8n fixed that by adding a 2nd, inner axle seal.. this design pretty much cured the problem, much as a sureseal (grease) kit solve dthe 9n/2n problem.

my 2n 8n, Naa, and 660 can lock wheels up and spin in place... because their brakes are maintained and the machine is properly serviced.

Lotsa farmers tended to forget those important words... like 'maintenance'.. etc..

Soundguy

The same point that validates statistics, kills their worth too.

On paper, an 8N was underpowered, under equipped, poor brakes, too lightweight, ect, ect,....

Yet they sold in droves. Specs and statistics don't always give a true indication of worth or popularity.

It's like a basketball game. The only "stat" that ever mattered was the final score.

On newer tractors;

I'm down on the "big 3" as well as the next 3 and the 3 after them for all these misleading stats they present to make their latest technological wonderdog look like a space shutle with 3-point hitch.

And on "old technology":

I didn't take the comment about Masseys old technology as a slur. In fact, I take it as a compliment to the brand. No need to change just for the sake of change. My only point was, their newer BIG ag tractors are just as modern as their competition. And at a lower sticker price. In my book, that's what I call a winner.

You want to impress me? Lower the price about 500%.

 

[Farmwithjunk]

For statistics.. you have to take them one at a time. Not all statistics are misleading.. just the ones marketing puts out (grin). Historacle statistics mean much more.. such as.. company 'X' produced 'yyyyyyyyy' tractors from this period in history to this period in history. It's a statistic that also happens to be fact.. unlike most info that come out of salesmen's mouths.

I couldn't hold an informed conversation on -anybody's- new ag line. If it's a 90 model or newer and over 100 hp.. I likely have not even seen it or heard about it. My ag tractor interest falls in the oldies..like the ford 8000/9600 .. TW series...big fiat/allis .. (fordson county .. for an oddity).. mid-late case 1xxx series.. etc.. etc. Old monsters that now sell for pennies on the dollar... Kinda sad that you can get a late 60's ford 8000 for about 4000$ now...dual rears and all...

As for ford N brakes.. they work fine... when adjusted and clean.

People have a tendency to do -0- service on machines then complain about them. Early Ford N sumps held just under 5g of tranny fluid. And people didn't service the hydro pump / rear end/ trannies well.. sludge built up
in the sump, and made the sump overfull if you just dumped in 5g on a refill. All that extra oil pooled at the axle trumpet mouths and tranny input shaft seals waiting for an excuse to leak. I can't count how many clutch jobs I've seen and people won't spend the whopping 4$ to replace the tranny input shaft seal on an N.. for added insurance... they wait till it leaks to fix it.. vs preventative maintenance.

As for the axle seals? 9n/2n didn't have an awesome setup.. but the sure-seal retrofit works perfectly if installed correctly.. thus ending greasy brake shoes. The stradle brake setup on the 9n / 2n also didn't suit many people well if they didn't adjust the clutch dog to depress the left brake pedal when clutching, thus giving you both brakes. I've seen tons of 9n/2n with wore out right brakes.. and 'new' left brakes.

Early 8n axle seals were prone to leak if the hub came loose... Again.. nobody bothered to read the manual and check that axle nut for 450f# every now and then, and thus.. once the nut became loose.. the soft cast hub worn against the hardened axle splines, and made a loose sloppy fit. the hub was tapered.. so once wore.. it would never tighten down... thus leaks occoured.

Later 8n fixed that by adding a 2nd, inner axle seal.. this design pretty much cured the problem, much as a sureseal (grease) kit solve dthe 9n/2n problem.

my 2n 8n, Naa, and 660 can lock wheels up and spin in place... because their brakes are maintained and the machine is properly serviced.

Lotsa farmers tended to forget those important words... like 'maintenance'.. etc..

Soundguy

When push comes to shove, it's all a matter of semantics. (Hope I spelled that one right) Stats and specs are not the same (TO ME) as facts and figures. Numbers of a certain model produced, for example, is a FACT. Specs are what that models manufacurer claimed it would do in a day.(again, TO ME)

On N brakes. My 150 Massey oe 3000 Ford has essentially the same style brake system as an early Ford. The parts are different, but they work simularly. Mine work like they're supposed to. Not all do. But even in their best condition, that's one area where modern tractors have it all over older ones. The oldies can lock a wheel and spin around, but hook a loaded hay rack to one and start down a steep hill. (Then if it DOES lock the wheels, you STILL have a nightmare on your hands)

Go back in time a bit. In the days when those N's were fairly new and used as a 1st tractor on some farms, maint. wasn't quite the same as it is on a "collectors" tractor. Things would get fixed or maintained, but not fussed over and kept perfect. There just wasn't that sort of time, nor money. All the N's, T-O Fergies, and just about all small to mid-sized tractors had a bad rep when it came to brakes back then. Wet brakes were a great addition.

But when you hear me start ragging about stats and specs, it's generally those PROPAGANDA numbers EVERY manufacturer spouts on their products.

The ONLY way any of these numbers will ever be truely meaningful would be to do independent testing, with EVERY make, EVERY model held to the same standards. (NEBRASKA TEST???) In most cases, manufacturers don't want that. They'd rather keep the confusion in force.

 

[Soundguy]

Ford 3000 brakes, will be very different than 8n brakes.. mostly due to hub and axle seal design that was inplemented with the hundred series.

Properly adjusted and maintain brakes should be able to be locked up.. or applied smoothly, and not grab. Ford used a self energizing design to help with brake pressure. I've never noticed a problem with my dry brakes.

Wet brakes tend to take more pressure to stop.. however they wear better and you don't have to worry about greasy brakes.. the downside is when you have to change them. It's a toss up for me as to which brakes I like better. Certaintly I do like the wet brakes on my thousand series units.. though.. for the smaller cut's the dry brakes are fine. I guess for wear though.. it's hard to beat the wet brakes.

Mentioning fergy's.. that's a whole different ball of wax when it comes to axle seals... Ans since axle seal failure is a prime source of brake problems.. the t'x' fergies have to be looked at differently than the ford N.. whether it is the 9n/2n style, or an naa style.. or hundred series style.. etc... in terms of axle seals.. etc.

I don't believe a word most salesmen say unless I can verify it for myself... manufacture specs are taken with a grain of salt.. I like to test drive and see what it feels like.. vs what is says it can do.

Reminds me of lawnmower engine specs... sure.. it's 25 hp... using different carb settings than the consumer uses.. at a different rpm range.. usually would up to 'explosion' level... thinner oil than consumer use.. and no belt or bolt on parasytic loads.

That hp number in that test is useless to me. i want to see what hp it develops.. under consumer rated speeds/loads/fuels/oils.. etc.

Soundguy

 

[Farmwithjunk]

I don't believe a word most salesmen say unless I can verify it for myself... manufacture specs are taken with a grain of salt.. I like to test drive and see what it feels like.. vs what is says it can do.

Soundguy

If a salesman tells me something I believe, or I tend to agree with, I start to wonder if I'M not wrong myself......

Gone are the days when Farm equipment dealers would "demo" tractors and implements. I can recall my grandfather having 3 or 4 different brands of tractors at his farm, trying each one at various chores, before buying one. He was a tough nut to crack for most dealers. If you wanted to sell him something, it better do everything you claimed, plus a little more.

Back to the brakes. I wasn't implying Massey brakes, 3000 Ford brakes and N series were the SAME, just that they were mechanical, and of the same basic thinking in their design. They all stop fine when adjusted and in good shape. It is when they are called upon to go "above and beyond" like so many farm tractors are used, that they are "just barely enough" sometimes. Big loads of hay, pulled at road speed comes to mind. No farmer I've ever known will stop until they've found that point just past reasonable limits with their equipment.

 

[MikePA]

Gone are the days when Farm equipment dealers would "demo" tractors and implements.

You should preface your remark with the qualifying phrase, "Where I live..." since 'those days' are not gone everywhere.

 

[Soundguy]

Back to the brakes. I wasn't implying Massey brakes, 3000 Ford brakes and N series were the SAME, just that they were mechanical, and of the same basic thinking in their design. They all stop fine when adjusted and in good shape. It is when they are called upon to go "above and beyond" like so many farm tractors are used, that they are "just barely enough" sometimes. Big loads of hay, pulled at road speed comes to mind. No farmer I've ever known will stop until they've found that point just past reasonable limits with their equipment.

Well.. I guess it goes without saying that you have to match your towed load with the braking capacity of the tow vehicle. The fact that an 8n or 3000 can't stop a 10000 pound hay trailer is by no means an error or flaw in the design of the brakes.. it's just that you are exceeding the limit by about 3x... that is a flaw/error inthe thinking of the farmer.. not the correctly working, but over taxed brake system on a cut.. etc..

I don't see it listed in many of the older manuals.. but the 2 newer tractors i have had did list their safe towed load in respect to braking, vs max towed load the drawbar could handle/ tractor get rolling..e tc.

Another braking Issue i see lots of people not using is engine braking. I have been at a stop and have seen a county mowing tractor glide up to a red light witht he op standing on the brakes, clutch pushed, and engine roaring at road rpm... vs letting the engine idle down and eat some of that speed... Go figure.. Guess he didn't own the tractor.. so he wasn't worried about it... That old .. "treat it like it was rented equipment" mentality...

Soundguy